Thrissur: In a major development in the fake drug case against Sheela Sunny, a beauty parlour owner in Chalakudy, the official who was in the team who seized a fake LSD stamp from Sheela's bag disclosed the source of the tip-off that led to the woman's arrest.
Excise Inspector Satheesan stated that the excise official took action against Sheela based on the information received through an internet call.
But the officials are clueless about the person who connected to them through internet call. The excise officials have summoned a woman based in Bengaluru who is Sheela's relative for a detailed interrogation into the case.
But it is learnt that she has moved to a hideout. The officials have failed to trace her as the mobile phone was also found switched off.
Meanwhile, the excise team has intensified the probe to identify the source of the fake LSD stamp that was recovered from Sheela's bag. Sheela who was behind bars for 72 days in the case will approach the High Court next week seeking to quash the charges against her.
Excise held back result of LSD test for over 1 month
The assistant chemical examiner Jyothi P. Mallya of the Kakkanad Regional Laboratory submitted the report on May 12 certifying that the seized stamps did not contain LSD. Although the exercise realised that it was a trumped-up charge, it neither informed the victim of the test result nor took steps to rectify the officials' mistake.
In an attempt to justify its stand, the excise claimed that the inspector who made the arrest had been transferred, but the decision to move the official out of the station was taken before the result of the laboratory test was received, it is learnt.
The alleged LSD stamps that were sent by the Irinjalakuda excise circle office through the Sessions Court, Thrissur, for the chemical test were received at the laboratory in Kakkanad on April 1, but the arrest was made on February 27.
Although such chemical tests usually take months, in this case, the result was made available within one and a half months. The laboratory had sent the test report to the excise range officer and circle officer of Chalakudy on May 12. They had received the report within a day. Oddly, the exercise did not inform the victim of this fact. By this time, Sheela Sunny had completed 72 days in jail and had been released on bail.
Sheela obtained the result of the chemical test through a request made by her advocate in court. The exercise explained away its conduct by merely stating that the department's crime branch was investigating the officials’ failure. But the department neither summoned the officer who arrested Sheela nor sought details about the incident.
Even though there are indications that the person who tipped off the excise had planted the stamps in Sheela’s scooter, action to trace the person will be initiated only under the direct supervision of the Excise Commissioner’s office.
